290034_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Division of Water Res ­ ',ices
Facility Number � � 0 Division of Soil and 4 Conservation
0 Other Agency •'*
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: )z Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: �idso!'1 Region: �_•
Farm Name: )Alin Farms Owner Email: ►1Mc1 NEC.. C e�jyl
Owner Name: �F� p�� L Phone:
Mailing Address: [) 5-Keen e4i to h N6i o2 7 a
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ��1,'1111 S LN-1 Title:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: LQU o Integrator: NCO r
Certified Operator: .�/ �a.t5��' c3�j Certification Number:
Ctt riSc�� �{�9S7Y �p_S.
Back-up Operator: M 0. 6 t . Cr G NL Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 3_ �JS S,;Z Longitude:
Hwy s tm i -d5 bw-t on . l L l�}-w ;� q 7 o r� 5
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars •
Other
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
ury t'ou
Layers
Non -Lay
Pullets
Other
Poults
Design Current
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes. notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
S o° 641 4)4 `'
18A p`. J • 1
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes b<'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[] Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [�(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes j(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: --3 Date of Inspection: p
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes .J�5'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
[
Identifier:
_&4 Q�t1
Spillway?: ^ 0
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes J�rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes D�`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? 9'Yes bKNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ❑ NA 0 N E
maintenance or improvement? 0lo
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes 15( �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop TYFe(s): Fe_,; ilk_ ri
13. Soil Types)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Da No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement'?
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
JR' ,Io
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required
Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
J'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
JV No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design [:]Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
2 . Does record keeping need i nprovernent'? If yes check e appropriate box belo ❑ Yes No ❑ A ❑ NE
[ aste Application Weekly Freeboar Waste Analysis Soil Analysis Weather Code
FP � Y Y Y
Rainfall [Stocking ❑ Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes &No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [] No CS 4 A ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate wa plication equipment as required by the perm NJ Yes ❑ No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes [ No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes [ No
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes IX I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes J�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes t� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes C'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
P5510&
#b ro�•kori 4�S`no- l�:�s�-P P4 rd tz�o ��,� br�+�o
&Q� survel doe- ;wll' p
4011
r V
5 +~
ql
re[�rdS
a1 amine, (9-0"P) LOas ag13, Flee
l l i t\M
�SIS�rl
rp�[cz
S f-VA+e 5 &o p 3",
re- 5a-pup le- a
l 1 .hP 1Dco.% +n'0 of tia-M
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Phone:
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date: 9 s 017
Page 3 of 3 IS. n f cxri�" V o l ve— C P f-e6 -U k l 1 I 2/412015 N p0 6
,gyplra��a tOr%rl"Aing 0u r►k_V (a-^gC, t5 t~r0-c-Vcc1 . Lu1Lt neRA to', i IOW,o

Division of Water Resources 10
Facility Number ®- ,3 Division of Soil and Water Conservation j
O Other Agency
Type of visit:
Compliance Inspection 0
Operation Review O Structure Evaluation
p Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit:
Routine Q Complaint
p Follow-up O Referral O Emergency
Q Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Oj Arrival Time: Departure Time: �" q ouln� t(y�A Region: 7�—Q
Farm Name: �11 n_r�VA!5 Owner Email: a 40'Y 4 [IVI
Owner Name: _.' )�.U1� l �j LU1 l jV] Phone: e
Mailing Address: 1 b lLP ?� �. 'b Vj � 2-1 2- 3 9
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: D��% In Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: 4/
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: Z' Y Longitude: �% t� �r , 6� !/
14 wy l09 5ouiil I D 4 w y g 7 5 VR'e_n ].
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Nan -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other_
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State'? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes[` No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge? 7�
Page I of 3 214,12014 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection: oZO
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
ffStructure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 3
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 5Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
K Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
C] Yes
Mi No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals
(Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate
Manure/Sludge
into
Bare Soil.
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved
Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
A
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
(g] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
i(� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design [:]Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. oes record keeping need i rovement? ❑ Yes No ❑ N ❑ NE
[Waste Applica 'on Weekly Freeboard 6iaste Analysis Soil Analysis We
Code
[Rainfall Stocking Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes %No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No W NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facili Number: a ;3 • Date of inspection: oZ 1
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 9� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [:]Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fait to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 10
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes �] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal? ,%,,�(
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes I YI No DNA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
`T�
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes [g] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application) T�
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use wings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
ue i n oot 7
c2 61S ? � &pp j� j �
1 i
1. 6 Loa -
I Lct i o r) i n 62.01 97-111 jaz 16 3o n vt�
lre' c� i rej a
A
l '1 z
F�
ekoUj da p oTd CLM
f» 1 1\f L i a v .L O WR R-lL =-
4' `1L
Ff ,
.b2 �a P off' c�a vh
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: -1 -7 �l✓} I I
Date: —';tl I I ' g,
21412014

FTWA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory
Governor
Dennis Loflin
Loflin Farms
1631 Skeen Rd
Denton, NC 27239-7702
Dear Dennis Loflin:
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
October 1, 2014
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No. AWS290034
Loftin Farms
Swine Waste Collection. Treatment.
Storage and Application System
Davidson County
In accordance with your renewal request, we are hereby forwarding to you this Certificate of Coverage
(CDC) issued to Dennis Loflin, authorizing the operation of the subject animal waste management system
in accordance with General Permit A WG 100000.
This approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but not limited to, the management
and land application of animal waste as specified in the facility's Certified Animal Waste. Management
Plan (CAWMP) for Loflin Farms, located in Davidson County, with a swine animal capacity of no
greater than the following annual: averages:
Wean to Finish:
Feeder to Finish: 787
Boar/Stud:
Wean to Feeder:
Farrow to Wean:
Gilts:
Farrow to Finish:
Farrow to Feeder:
Other:
If this is a.Farrow to Wean or Farrow to Feeder operation. there may be one boar for each 15 sows. Where
boars are unnecessary, they may be replaced by an equivalent number of sows. Any of the sows may be
replaced by gilts at a rate of 4 gilts'for every 3 sows.
This COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until September 30, 2019: and shall hereby void
Certificate of Coverage Number AWS290034 that was previously issued to this facility. Pursuant to. this
COC, you are authorized and required to operate the system in. conformity with the conditions and
limitations as -specified in the General Permit. the facility's CAWMP, and this COC. An adequate system
for collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data and operational information must be
established for this facility. Any increase in waste production greater than the certified design capacity or
increase in number of animals authorized by this COC (as provided above) will require a modification to
the CAWMP and this COC and must be completed prior to_ actual increase; in either wastewater flow or
number of animals -
Please read this COC and the enclosed State General Permit carefully. Please pay careful attemion to the
record keeping and monitoring conditions in this Rermit..Record kee in forms are tinchan Ted with this
General_ Permit. Please continue: to use the same record keeping forms.
1636 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North -Carolina 27699-1636
Phone: [phone] t Internet: htty:/lwww.nodenr.00vl
An Equal Opportvnily 1 Afrmafve A.IIbn Employer - Made in part by recycled paper

0
•
Permit Number AWG100000
NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
SWINE WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM GENERAL PERMIT
This General Permit is issued. pursuant to North Carolina G.S. § 143-215 et seq., may apply to any swine: facility in
the State of North Carolina, and. shall be effective-fromOctober. 1, 2014 until September SO, 2019.
All activities,authorized herein shall be consistent with the terms and conditions of this General Permit:
Holders of Certificates of Coverage (COC) under this' General Permit shall comply with the following specified
conditions and limitations.
I. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Any discharge of waste that reaches surface waters or wetlands is prohibited except. as otherwise
provided in this General Permit and associated statutory and regulatory provisions. Waste shall
not reach surface waters or, wetlands by runoff, drift, manmade conveyance, direct application,
direct discharge or through ditches, terraces, or grassed waterways not otherwise classified as
state waters.
The waste collection, treatment, storage .and application system operated under this General
Permit shall beeffectively maintained and operated as a non -discharge system to prevent the
discharge of pollutants to surface waters or wetlands. Application of waste to terraces and
grassed waterways is acceptable as long as it is. applied in, accordance with Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) Standard's and does -not result in a discharge of waste to surface
waters, orwetlands. _
Facilities .must be designed;: constructed, operated, :and maintained' to contain all waste plus the
runoff from a.25-year, 24-hour. rainfall event for the location of the facility. A facility that has a
discharge of waste that results: because of a storm event 'more severe than the 25-year, 24-hour
storm will not be considered to be in violation of this General Permit if the facility is otherwise in
compliance with -its Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAMP) and this General
Pimnit.
Any • discharge, or :application of waste, to a ditch that drains to surface waters or wetlands is
prohibited except.as follows. (a) discharges from the ditches are controlled by best management
practices (BMPs) designed in accordance with NRCS standards; (b) the BNT§ have been
submitted to and approved by the Division of Water Resources (Division); (c) the BUTS. were
implemented as designed to prevent a discharge to surface waters or wetlands; (d) the waste was
removed immediately from the ditch upon discovery; and (e) the event was documented and
reported in accordance with Condition IIl_13. of -this General Permit. 'Nothiirg in this exception
shall excuse a discharge to surface waters or wetlands except as may result.. because of rainfall
from a storm,event more severe than the 25-year, 24-hour storm.
2. This General Permit does not allow the Permittee to cause a violation of any of the water quality
standards established pursuant to Title 15A, Subchapter 2B of the North Carolina Administrative
Code and Title 15A, Subchapter. 2L of the North Carolina Administrative Code.
March 7, 2014

...... _ •v �n•y •v •rw.a aa. vavwyvvu wv►aav • 1/LdLVI/'J
Freeboard', Rainfall, Monthly lnspection3 & Stocking Record for 3-Month Period
Farm Owner Facility Number F: C, -
Operator �� Struct re Type
Year Structure Name
�
��lii3a
�
W7=
L•�
Average Monthly Stocking Number
9. o0 1Boa
1. Freeboard is the difference between the lowest point of a waste storage structure embankment and the level of Nuld. For structures with spillways.
the ddference between the level of liquid and the bottom'of the spillway should be recorded.
2..Freeboard levels must be recorded'at least weekly.
3. Relnfali must be recorded for every rain event Initialing Indicates that an Inspection of the waste collection, treatment,.and storage structures, and
runoff control measures was conducted to Insure proper operation.

. _..... ...... ... �... aJ ... .. PV �.+ Vay.-W-'--Y1 t—V 0 IrLOIGUvy
Freeboardf'2, Rainfall, Monthly Inspection & Stocking Record'for 33-Month Period
Farm Owner. w l�t� Facility NumberiL
Operator Structure Type —
Year Structure Name
R
®
or
Average Monthly Stocking Number
i 6 _D
1. Freeboafd Is the difference between the lowest point of a waste storage structure embankment and the level of liquid. For structures with splilways,
the difference between the level of liquid and the bottom- of the spillway should be recorded.
2. Freeboard levels must be. recorded at least weekly;
3. Rainfall must be recorded for every rain event. Initialing Indicates that an Inspection of the waste coltection, treatment..and storage structures, and
runoff control measures was conducted to Insure proper operation.

f"
' — _ .. .,.. �..�.,.. •�CIJ LV ViVIgaO val wvaulo • VLWLVV`J
Freeboard'', Rainfall, Monthly Inspection" & Stock€ng Record for 3-MontFi Period
Farm Owner 'j FacHity Number
Operator Structure Type
Year Q Structure Name
s rnA
Average Monthly Stocking Number
1. Freeboard is the difference between the lowest point of a waste storage structure embankment and the level of liquid. For structures with spillways
the difference between the level of riquld and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
2. Freeboard levels must be recorded at least weekly:
3. Rainfall must be recordedfor every rain event. Initialing Indicates that an Inspectl4n of the waste collecdon, treatment,.and storage structures, and
runoff control measures was conducted to Insure proper operation,

f_
Freeboardt'x, Rainfall, Monthly Inspection & Stocking Record for 3-Month Period
Farm owner Y`f Facility Number
Operator Structure Type
Year ' Structure Name
I. LL I lr �.PS+ - a r"W r'
��iir���f®rar
®��■
Average Monthly Stocking Number
y(0-?- �o
1. Freeboard Is the difference between the lowest point of.a waste storage structure embankment and the level of IlGuld_ For structures with spillways
the difference be the level of liquid and the bottom of.the spillway should be recorded.
2. Freeboard levels must be recorded at least weekly.
3. Rainfall must be recorded•for every rain event. Initialing Indicates that an Inspectign of the waste collection, treatmerd,.and storage structures. and
runoff control measures was conducted to Insure proper operation.

' �..-... ...�-- ..+ �...yw r.o.aw-.,.•veyyv Y�INVLN�O � ULp�LW�J
Freeboards,2, Rainfall, Monthly inspection & Stocking Record for 3-Month Period
Farm Owner N �Lt Facility Number -
Operator Structure Type
Year S— Structure Name
1=1014
IUA���
®��rdm
���M
Average Monthly Stocking Number
t, Freeboard Is the difference between the lowest point of a waste storage structure embankment and the level of. squid. For structures with spillways,
the difference between the level of Ilquld and the bottom of the spillway should be.recorded.
2. Freeboard levels must be recorded at least weekly.
3. Rainfall must be recorded for every: rain event. Inttlaling Iridlcates that an Inspeclign of the waste collection, treatment.. and storage structures, and
runoff control measures was conducted to insure proper operation.

. � ..�.� ... �+.+yw •tuow vrvssa aav vurr.+rusa � 1l�plCVU`J
Freeboard'-2, Rainfall, Monthly Inspection3 & Stocking Record for 3-Month period
Farm Owner N] Facility Humber
Operator Structure Type
Year Structure tame
Tn ., 1r) 4 rG
--•
��
E
-•-••sir-•�-
i
Average Monthly Stocking Number
04
1. Freeboard is the difference between the lowest point of a waste storage structure embankment and the level of tlquid. For structures with spillways,
the difference between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
2. Freeboard levels must be recorded at least weekly.
3. Rainfall must be recorded for every rain event. Initialing Indicates that an Inspection of the waste collection, treatment, -and storage structures, and
runoff control measures was conducted to Insure proper operation.

F/rr '
0 Division of Water. Resour
Facility Number - O Division of Soil and Water C nservation
O Other Agency
type of Visit: ® Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation p Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: ® Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: - -lof Arrival Time: Q Gt7a Departure Time:County:Region L O
Farm Name: Zo A4, S _ �^ Owner Email:
Owner Name: ��yrfif z"f X ? Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: ' a'o'z
e e.1
Facility Contact: �G:�i'I %S zo//`it- Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:y
Back-up Operator:
2 7-t3 S
Integrator:
Phone: �$O✓�0 b�Ce��
uru�s
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
ff4)yL1 ;
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Ca aci Pop.
La ers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
.Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes ,allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ,Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: 1J.' - 7j: "—i Date of Inspection:
Ze35
NW
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
P�_No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
/Structure
Identifier: L
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): G
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
R1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
Z j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation Poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
fZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
JK No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
�No
[DNA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
Jallo
❑ NA
0 NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. []Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): lL�, Lest 5'elca /aff—
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
4E�] No
❑ NA
[j NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
a] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
0[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Z] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
•R No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check
❑ Yes
J�LNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑Wf3P ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
,kNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather
Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
�KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
�A
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412014 Continued

Facili Number: Z 9 - Date of Inspection: — S
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [:]Yes ED No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes &jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes E. No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes CEg-jjlo ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes JE§ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes >�LNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
ZOO
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 3�(7` 7XG V/
Date: — t'ls
21412014

Division of Water Resource
Facility Number ®- 4 Division of Soil and Water r' servation g
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: WRoutine O Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: �Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:, j"egion: b-]s P—d
Farm Name: t &rZ Owner Email:
Owner Name: D n I S LG//'y] Phone:
Mailing Address: 1631 &eet faVl l /I Ci d— 7 2- 3
Physical Address: Y'
Facility Contact: 1)e' i n I S Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: SQ— 6/ e-
Certified Operator: Certification Number: N 9 PU ry f S
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude: i Z 31 X 16
loq S. ' &,— ,w q 7 ` 5-
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Non-L;
Pullets
Other
Poults
Design Current
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Daia Heifer
Da Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
oNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
�eNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection: l
Waste Collection & Treatment 4 Awl
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ,k�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2
Identifier:
Spillway?:
D A b d
Structure 3 Structure 4
esgne ree oar (an).
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes C�(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
A�'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
N/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals
(Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application
Outside of Approved
Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s): () j
P.
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
0 NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ YesZZ
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? D4 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes k No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
;(V
oes record keeping need i provement? ❑Yes No ❑ ❑ NE
aste Application eekly Freeboard 9Waste Analysis Soil Analysis ❑ Weather Code
Rainfall [Stocking op Yield 1[ _ 120 Minute Inspections �Vlonthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections N/Udge Survey9,"
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes oNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facili Number: - 3 Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? �} ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
C
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes �yNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes X No ❑ NA [] NE
❑NA []NE
❑NA []NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes X. o ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the ReviewerlInspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ' No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawinus of facility to better explain situations (use additional naees as necessarv).
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? Yes
�No
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑Yes
�No
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑Yes
P�N
oIf
yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑YesNopermit?
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over-application)31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
El YesNo
X
❑ Application Field [I Lagoon/Storage Pond El Other:
T, o
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
� �013. z .� for 70
6 5e,�r�o�1L
N/ Ig/13 - j,L�,r A 5,A/
Phone:
Date:
-� � — qq
21412014

ivisiou of Water Quality ' p" ~•"
FacilityNutnber I - TIVIsion of Soil and Water'Conservahon:
0 Other,,Agincy
Type of Visit: Arcompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: a �Q j`17Arrival Time: f® Departure Time: County: )'XV j�p Region: VV 5(Z6
Farm Name: ti j'� �( �' Owner Email:
Owner Name: Ti1�1 s5 L ^� j h Phone: �Qo� Iq
Mailing Address: 10 3 5 jL Berl RA. I T)1-to A Z 7 23 9
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: D {� n i � L 7- h Title: Phone: p� SQ - 3 $ L
Onsite Representative: Integrator: N 1 V I—V [ S
Certified Operator: Certification Number: N? 24A
b��3r aof�
Back-up Operator: Certification Number: y
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
NC, y IN 5., L N L H-vv 4 4 7; OP, sv.,e_-e_,
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
I I Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pon.
La ers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA [3 NE
❑ Yes C ] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 14 No'❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes JkNo Q NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge? \
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - . Date of Inspection: 3
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes rvNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier. OOYj
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes �d No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? 0 Yes L] No ❑ NA ONE
8. Do any of the structures tack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks) (X
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes 0! No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Aanlication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes eNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes 9
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes LN No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes TN
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yeso ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
VRa
s record keeping need i provement?-if-yo&r ho �e�eroP� ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ A ❑ NE
te Applic ian [Weekly Freeboard ❑ Was falysis ❑ Soil � t�isis [�atta-�ansfM Weather Code
fall [Stocking ❑ Cro field ❑ 120 Minute Inspections [Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections Sludge Survey
�� t40 y�,$�' V
22. Did the facility fail to install an maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes $ No [] NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No tSraA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes TTTT"''�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes Or -
El Yes 1Pdo
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes
;g No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes
['(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
C5J.No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pates as necessary).
S 5 j Ud�J�e_ s u
7. V" fl© n nn 40-m ? Loar k,i � oR
1
ejuip fte-4f- u-e;e-J ;>
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 7 7 - sag 9
Date: L6 f_3
21412011

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number j - Division of Soil and Water Co ervation /I J
0 Other Agency A +`'j
.1
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: O 3 aD Arrival Time: Q Departure Time: County: r) Region: U.5 P
Farm Name: L o I h Ear ms Owner Email:
j
Owner Name: � �111 �1S � [ I ��l'1 Phone: '—q(oa q {�
Mailing Address: _ 10,31 j 1( a`✓er)
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: `f_fl U1 S L,D-' I j'1 Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: D 211 41 l5 I
p [ I I integrator: �y r
u Certified Operator: Certification Number: �� (p�h r'+h�
� Back-up {aj3l��ol�-
Operator: Certification Number: }
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Me, w� M S. I P tic H w� L(7 ,@ S lc_e-e Jd
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
ceder to Finish Q .7
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
.Non
-Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes I No
[—]Yes [] No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑NA ❑NE
[DNA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters [—]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
21412011 Continued

[Facility Number: R7 - 32 1• jDate of Inspection: v of
MW
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
& Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: L60 00 n
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes Wo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) T
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes NXNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? T'jeYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste A lication ��(
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes I Y I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? `i'
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
[:]Yes
WNo
❑ NA
0 NE
❑ Yes
PjrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 90
❑ Yes P<No
❑ Yes XNo
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? 3 - ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
,�Zi
Applica 'on Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysis Weather Code
aI Stocking Crop Yield R120 Minute Inspections Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspection Sludge Surve
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑Yes No E
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No R'NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili . Date of inspection: L
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes CTo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
§No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
;4"No
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
)k No
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately,
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
XNo
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
Pf
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
KNo
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[XNo
TWNo
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
0 Yes
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
r
❑NA�❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
1.
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
l�? N o�
tuck e-
SvrJ �
a&
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Mo 01���M
I -OW
Phone: 7 _� 1- s a $ 9
Date: 101.3 1-0 t a-
21412011

r� u 90 Division of Water Quali
Facility Number - O Division of'Soil a'nd`Water servatton. a
O Other Agency
Type of Visit:
Compliance Inspection 0
Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation
O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit:
Routine O Complaint
O Follow-up O Referral Q Emergency
O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: j� � Arrival Time: y ro Departure Timer County: T)a V 1j50r1 Region: j,t <, A.Q
Farm Name: ,(-� y� Fo-r 111 Owner Email:
r
Owner Name: �1 /� l S Lpt 1 1'i Phone: a S b 3 S{
Mailing Address: ! -O � h-j L a -7 3 �j
h
Physical Address:
Y
Facility Contact: �0 i l n Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: h p'n
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Phone:
Integrator: Thd�pQ}'ldt-
Certification Number: J-
Certification Number:
Latitude: _3 S 35 G-,P- Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity . Pop.
Layer I �A
Non -Layer
ury routtry
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Design Current
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Design Current.:.
Cattle Capacity - Pop:
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes 9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ZNo
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

[Facility Number: jDate of Inspection: o2b
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 14 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Gi. pon
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes { No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan? T
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes X
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [ rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Windla.
ow ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): e_5C_u e- _rGl?eY_
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes , to ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes j!O'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes 1 Igo ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes I$ No
❑ Yes &_<0"
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
13rwaste Application �We kly Freeboard aste Analysis i�Soil Analysis ante Transfers �eather Code
ainfall rocking Crop Yield Minute Inspections t❑-'Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections D-<Iudge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: 9 - 9 71 Amik FDA'ateof Inspection: 1 1 b1
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste appllCdtion equipment as required by the permit? ❑Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [:]Yes [:]No NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
y(
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
�T
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
b�
01 7 5 J�O-i r �r 1 &
5 r �Ce_ n G Of P (k cu h o IA s
CaCi braniort due_ Lt O-PP iCQ- orS o
saCC-Ur t
a e tic �t �cf tU� Ltq +�P
Q-re a d 13
S r► r �U q L D a
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewerilnspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date: i % oP-n l
21412011
do

_ AM
i' `YLR'Y' Y 3 .p�rFap"�` 3 - -^ 6 Z.i -tom 1'�. • -
- - Ds�ision of Wa#er Quahty�
d 4
t �Facllt ;Nuriiber : Z O Dtrtston of So 1 and��1'ater Conservation.
sa �.
.ems
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit )R(Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: if Zf D , Arrival Time: Z ; SD Departure Time: 8� County: Pal.yliid A Region: hrsRD
j Farm Name: L a 1 11r"R tMf Owner Email:
Owner Name: ("/ti f,'_AGe 4- DenDe#qi If L-0 f f "A J� Phone: p
Mailing Address: 100 -7 Skee_,o Rd, !/ Pr1-& v, l) G z 7 Z3 I
Physical Address: tt,,��
Facility Contact: Uf.,tA #if LWA, Title: Phone No:(
Oncite RPnrPCPntntive- DeA,, 11 Lo�1 rH Inteoratar!
Certified Operator: PeA,\ '1 ��'�) Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 0 o [a] I l s g" Longitude: ® ° ®1 09
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
>(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 . 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Z — 3 • Date Inspection D Z
of
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: Li Qmy,
Spillway?. -
Designed Freeboard (in):
ii
Observed Freeboard (in): A�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes );�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes ANo
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes _kNo El NA El NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) ``
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ YesXNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement'?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes kNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
l 1. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Croptype(s). cue_ ISJJw
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does'the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ YesTKNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
[INE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes<No
❑ NA
❑ NE
I S. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment`?
❑ Yes ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
7 6,nt�e t10� o� �rd�ct/h/Ge�L %2MOrr�l� J�G X! GJ�T-Lj ��
Reviewer/Inspector Name ��al n.'���I Phone: 73(, - ?7/- 2-8.�7-
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 07I Z9 LpJ d
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

.. Facility Number: *of Inspection 0 r7
Required
Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
kyes El No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes XNo
[INA
ElNE
El❑ Design ❑Maps ❑Otherthe appropriate box. WUP ❑ Checklists
21.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑Yes WNo
ElNA
❑ NE
dkaste Application Weekly Freeboard �Wto Analysis Soil Analysis
Rainfall E31tocking LVCiop Yield U 1-20 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections [V Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes -_No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No
XNA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
ElYes XNo
ElNA
[:3NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
f}M
T ;Vyes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes kNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ yes XNo
❑ NA
ElNE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes K'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
32.
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes )�.No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes kNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
21, 2009 sa'l ���J 1�s,1 ? GQ ✓
X 7✓-3010)
FM J � s�Fo�:Ke� -
�'M� rnA &I/r/kA f WX�
�rc,l2C7o'�
— Iit> 1
21r�t�t
S'pIf, ?do7 a .
1 ✓
tt
/0/dl Ne �f G . Jh+cc /41r POO
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Facility Number
Division of Water Quality'.
Division of Soil and Water Conservation 1 l(m
O Other Agency I
Type of Visit C�Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ( Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: "((}� Arrival Time: � Departure Time: � � County: Region:
Farm Name: �,4 , n Owner Email:
Owner Name: CJax-etllGe. `_Iwn L5-11 n Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: IR oo
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No: ~' $��] • 4 9
Onsite Representative: _��_ Integrator:. PU ry_j, e-1
Certified Operator: �, r115 �rr - Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude:
Mo
onto ► 3C, Rw 4 4 7.
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -La et
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
DU Feeder to Finish
El Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Daia Calf
❑ Daia Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures: FT
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Yes
❑No
El NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Cl Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number- A q—J q I Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
`'
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes
�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
�6 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or ] 0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
El NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
El NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
El
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
�_l jtA 6 I'\
Reviewer/Inspector Name SPi Phone: a02$9
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur Date:
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — 3 Date of Inspection g
�9 9 0
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
ElWUP El Checklists El Design El Maps El Other
21. Does r cord keeping nee0ekly
ovement? ❑ Yes [I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Does
Application Freeboard Waste Analysis oil Analysis
nfall [Stocking rop Yield 120 Minute Inspections q/onthly and 1" Rain Inspections eather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29, Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30, At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
:Z I a,00� fat I +es+ ce5 L) 145 7 �- — e
❑ Yes & No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
Yes t&No
❑ Yes 0, No
❑ Yes tl No
❑ Yes gNo
(�(NA ❑ NE
El NA ❑NE
El NA [3 NE
El NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
�S Sl IJAe- Surneeded b -_e�A of o-U)O . 1 S �S`�' -.
t
0 c4 - I, a ooq (�� �-JA
r
Page 3 of 3 12128104

} jpivision of Water Qtiai�l
]#acilttvNumber 3 "Dwvisidn of Soi! and'VVa a onservatioii 16
0;`.066r Agency -
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Timer Departure Time: ® County: O Region: (�=
Farm Name: 0.1' M J I Owner Email:
Owner Name: C our � ee '5 1 ! r) Phone:
Mailing Address: 1067 `7 it-eeAnPQ 1 bre n �zn NL '� 9
Physical Address:
rj 3 �� 59 - o��
Facility Contact: ���jn l_5 IJDt� [ i n ___ Title- Ph No i
Onsite Representative: INM n1:5 -af Ian Integrator: r Vj-5
Certified Operator:., Din ,1 5 n Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Q •4 to S
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
-Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: ® o ® { © 11
Longitude: ®" ®. W
t- e t o vi4o NC 47. P. � h-t onto 5 V ­e� N .
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Lavers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: ELI.
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — • Date of Inspection I OVA Apr,
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: In
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
4No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
�No
ElNA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWO
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
0 Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
[)(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes 4No []NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ElNE
ElExcessive Ponding ElHydraulic Overload [IFrozen Ground ElHeavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
XNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
kNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
NJ
tb_
Reviewer/Inspector Name rffi
-- l Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
A. Date:
Page 2 of 3 r r L - f V 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: w9—Ii4 'etc or inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
❑ Yes >(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ;No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21. Doe record keeping need im2Crop
ement? If yes, check a appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
ste Ap�eing
L1d'ly Freeboard aste Analysis ❑ Soil Analvsis realign
Rainfall Yield 120 Minute Ins ections N l� onthl and i" Rain Ins ections Weather Code
p Y p
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes tR<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment'? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes Xo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes iii No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes eo ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency" ❑ Yes �kNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
A ton l Comments and/or Drawings:
i {p f-0_+7 d o �� u r e-0-a`, n I r\ �3 e goo
Sludc�Q sury no-- re$vtred un�II end CC aooq
a aool � ao®s Sol l +e sf re tJ I+s ? aoo2 of -
� �(� Names b� �a13 � � oq, •
Nk
0
C"
O
12128104

E Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency ��II
Facility Number : 290034 Facility Status: Active -Permit: A18L5290034_ U Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Qavid5on Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 02108/2007 Entry Time:09750 AM Exit Time: 3" 6M Incident #:
Farm Name: Loftin Farms Owner Email:
Owner: Clarence Loflin
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 1007 Skeen Rd Denton lL272397702_ _
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Location of Farm:
Integrator:
Latitude:35°35'52" Longitude:80°04'09"
109 south into the Town of Denton - Take a left onto NC 47 and travel about 3 miles then take a right onto Skeen Rd. (SR 2520) for
4/10 mile and the farm is on the left.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream impacts
Records and Documents
Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Otherlssues
Certified Operator: Dennis C Loflin Operator Certification Number: 20239
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Dennis Loflin Phone:
24 hour contact name Dennis Loflin Phone:
Primary Inspector: M lissa Rosebrock @C Phone:
Inspector Signature: \AADate: c�1� 0-7
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
21. No waste applied in 2006. None applied in 2007 yet.
21. 2006 soil tests...ok.
24. Completed.
25. Completed.
Page: 1

• •
Permit: AWS290034 Owner -Facility: Clarence Loftin Facility Number : 290034
Inspection Date: 02/08/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 787 0
Total Design Capacity: 787
Total SSLW: 106,245
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
kgoon LAGOON 18.00 30.00
Page: 2•

• o-
Permit: AWS290034 Owner- Facility: Clarence Loflin Facility Number: 290034
Inspection Date: 02/08/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for VisIt: Rouline
Discharges & Stream Ifnpacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ 130
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) Cl ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ 110
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑ ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management' ❑
■
❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑ ❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures requite maintenance or
❑
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect. application?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS290034 Owner -Facility: Clarence Lotlin Facility Number : 290034.
Inspection Date: 02/08/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.? ❑
Total P205? ❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? ❑
Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑
Evidence of wind drift? ❑
Application outside of application area? ❑
Crop Type 1 Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2-
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14, Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
n
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes„ check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
❑
Page: 4

r1
f�J
r �
Permit: AW5290034 Owner - Facility: Clarence Loftin Facility Number: 290034
Inspection Date: 02/08/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Other? ❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after> 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES
only)? ❑
■
❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

•
•
Permit: AWS290034 Owner - Facility: Clarence Loilin
Facility Number: 290034
Inspection Date: 02/08/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ ■ 0 0
❑ ■ 11 0
Page: 6

I°
Facility Number
Division: of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit
Compliance Inspection
0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation
0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
Routine 0 Complaint
0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency
0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: �County: tav o h Region: 0 5 �y
Farm Name: 1-611 h ar rV')6 Owner Email:
Owner Name: Q"rf-y\C-e- + Y1 Phone:
Mailing Address: 007- 6 K=:! 'r" - _ �VC_� 02 7 Z3�
[ - i7�fo rn
Physical Address:
��.tnn'�S L�rtn
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
C �S� - 3 $ b
Onsite Representative: P�1 h Ig-, I Ir1 Integrator: �V r V W
Certified Operator: OW nIs----LcrG Ln--- - Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: [E]O RT to �" Longitude: ®° � 6
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Laver
I _ 111 ❑ Non -Layer - - - - -- — -- .
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
E]Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures: 7
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes 6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: V — 3 • Date of Inspection .
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
ElYes
INO ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5 Structure 6
.q ooyi
j Identifier: Le,
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): ,3Q
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
O ►No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
ElNA ElNE
�No
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or
environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes]
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
[YNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
tNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or I O Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside
of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
�((
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
�No
bGo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
No
[I NA
El NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
El Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Neel
Reviewer/inspector Name I t'b Phone: o� o
Reviewer/Inspector Signature Date: A I Q
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: q — 3 date of Inspection rd 0
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes lNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes IJ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Doe record keeping need improvement? box below. �, ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Application EfWee ly Freeboard., � Waste Analysis [16oil Analysis
Rainfall NI/Stocking Zvi Crop Yield L]Y120 Minute Inspections [w(onthly and V Rain Inspections 2W/eather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency'?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
K NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
;K No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
JANo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
0NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
JQNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
N(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
a� No LA_gS4-e_ a. tr ;Loofa gr c le,r S' 3IC0
a No
�t "i���
f l abo(��
Page 3 of 3 12128104

0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 290 34 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS290034 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
_ Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine
County: Davidson _ Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 10/26/2006 . Entry Tlme:09:30 AM
Exit Time: 11:50 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Loftin Farms
Owner Email:
Owner: Clarengg LoflinPhone:
3W-859-2239
Mailing Address: 1007 Skpen Rd
Denton NC 272397702
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: '35'52" Longitude: 80"04'09"
109 south into the Town of Denton - Take a left onto NC 47 and
travel about 3 miles then take a right onto Skeen Rd. (SR 2520) for
4110 mile and the farm is on the left.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection
Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Dennis C Loflin
Operator Certification Number: 20239
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
Title Phone
On -site representative Dennis Loflin
Phone:
24 hour contact name Dennis Loflin
Phone:
Primary Inspector: M i sa osebrock
. @ii
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date: Da(. n (¢
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
21, 2006 soil samples taken but not onsile. Check results next visit
21, No waste applied in 2006. No records required this year.
24. Calibration due again in 2008.
25. Sludge survey was completed this Fall.
Page: 1

• 0
Permit: AWS290034 Owner - Facility: Clarence Loflin
Inspection Date: 10/26/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 290034
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Feeder to Finish 787 426
Total Design Capacity: 787
Total SSLW: 106,245
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
koon LAGOON 18.00 48.00
Page: 2

•
Permit: AWS290034 Owner -Facility: Clarence Loflin Facility Number: 290034
Inspection Date: 10/26/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Vlsit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No
NA
NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
Cl
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6, Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
MOO
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

•
•
Permit: AWS290034 Owner - Facility: Clarence Loftin
Inspection Date: 10/26/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 290034
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA NE
PAN?
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
n
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
n
Outside of acceptable crop window?
n
Evidence of wind drift?
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Fescue
(Flay)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
n
■
n n
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑ n
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? n
■
n n
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
n
■
n n
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
n
■
n n
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
n
■
n n
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
n
■
n n
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
n
Page: 4

Permit: AWS290034 Owner -Facility: Clarence Loflin
Facility Number: 290034
Inspection Date: 10126/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)? n
■
n
n
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
Cl
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? Cl ■ ❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ 0
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

• •
Permit: AWS290034 Owner -Facility: Clarence Loflin Facility Number : 290034
Inspection Date: 10/26/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
n■nn
n0❑❑
11 ■ Q ❑
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number Division of Soil and Water Conservation a0 --J Ci �17r�
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: I / t./. 30 I Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: ` [ In `ll-��—�� Owner Email: r� tGV1 P,0_Iia Lee
Owner Name: tJ1�.V�c� �'l In �_'li n Phone:
! —7 I 1 ►,l .,.. 1 1
Mailing Address: 10! �i�,�-� 0. ��� +0V1 ("�� a Q1 Jam'
Physical Address: `
Facility Contact: r Ylis �.O L nTitle: Phone No. C' R5-0
Onsite Representative: 3 )eAah L-z) I oyit. 1) Integrator: W 67yu f Y f 5 'r o-r 1'K
Certified Operator: _ T'\P111 Y1 [ S L OT Ul' t Operator Certification Number: d �39
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: M1�7
I ✓T Longitude:
2-a-� C) <60h3 p
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Nan -La er
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Lavers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
i
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures: ET,
l
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page l of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — '' Date of Inspection �a .
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus stone storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: �_ a.1 c6'
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ yes
Ifi No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ElNE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑Yes
No ElNA ElNE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
/
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
)No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
a
oc
Reviewer/Inspector Name I r Phone: 17 O
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date:
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Fate of Inspection 0
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ,,�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes L�l No El NA El NE
the appropriate box. i
❑ WUP El Checklists El Design [I Maps [I Other
21. Doe "record keeping need improvement? I ❑ Yes XNo El NA ❑ NE
Waste Application ►I_f' Weekly Freeboard VWasteAnalysis Soil Analysis o-;��3ie-*re�an^rs
Rainfall �/Stocking ❑ Crop Yield V20 Minute Inspections E Monthly and I" Rain Inspections pd Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26, Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
�NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
IRNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
% No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ElNA
ElNE
ElYes
/No
Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
igNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes NYVo ❑ NA ❑ NE
nal Comments and/or Drawings:
aqat
0
Page 3 of 3 � o ~- fW to 12/28/04

•
0
N Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number. 290 Facility Status: Active _ Permit: AWS290034 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection _ Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Da idson Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 11/2312005 _ Entry Tim e:08:50 AM_ Exit Time: 10:45 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Loflin Farms Owner Email:
Owner. Clarence Loflin
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 1007 Skeen Rd Denton NC 272397702
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35° Longitude: 80'04'09"
109 south into the Town of Denton - Take a left onto NC 47 and travel about 3 miles then take a right onto Skeen Rd. (SR 2520) for
4110 mile and the farm is on the left.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts © Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Dennis C Loflin Operator Certification Number: 20239
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Dennis Loflin Phone:
24 hour contact name Dennis Loflin Phone:
Primary Inspector: Melissa Rosebrock Phone: [phone]
Ext.383
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
7. Woody vegetation has been cut on the embankment.
21. 2005 soil samples were sent about 2 weeks ago. Check results next visit.
21. IRR-1 has been completed. Operator needs to update IRR-2 for Fall 2005 applications to document PAN balance. To be
completed when waste sample results are received. Check next visit.
28. Need to update WUP with the number of acres per hydrant so that operator can maintain accurate IRR-2 records. See tech
specialist.
Page: 1

Permit: AWS290034 Owner - Facility: Clarence Loilin Facility Number : 290034
Inspection Date: 11/23/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 787 426
Total Design Capacity: 787
Total SSL.W: 106,245
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
�agoon LAGOON 18.00 60.00
Page: 2

•
•
Permit: AWS290034 owner -Facility: Clarence Loflin Facility Number: 290034
Inspection Date: 11/23/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
Cl
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4, Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (LeJ large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
Cl
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Plot applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS290034 Owner -Facility: Clarence Loftin Facility Number: 290034
Inspection date: 11/23/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.? ❑
Total P205?
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
Outside of acceptable crop window?
Evidence of wind drift?
Application outside of application area? Q
Crop Type 1 Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
n
■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Q
■
Ci
Q
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
0
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
■
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
Q
Page: 4

0
Permit: AWS290034 Owner- Facility: Clarence i_oflin Facility Number: 290034
Inspection Date: 11/23/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Vlslt: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Other? ❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application? ❑
120 Minute inspections?
■
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
Cl
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
Cl
❑
23, if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■
❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
Cl
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
Cl
■
❑
Cl
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those
❑
■
❑
❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concem? If yes, contact a regional Air
❑
■
❑
❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS290034 Owner - Facility: Clarence Loftin Facility Number : 290034
Inspection Date: 11/23/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Otherlssues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ■ Cl ❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ Cl
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

F�a.cil�tyNumber
_ J
p of WaterQk; 4 1 L_9,61visi(
Dtvisit n O'Uo Sbil and,Watee Co servatton
:A{
Q`Otlier Agency
Type of Visit ompliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arri,-al Time: FN 50 Departure Time: I1� County: dNl O r) Region: W S 0
Farm Name: L Off' I Vl P00.q-Owner Email: �tC7�`R t' _ �( ��ce—
o�.r�.y� can
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: Facility Contact:J it 1j 1� l� Title:
Onsite Representative::�.1�?_ N•L (�
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Phon N (S) _611% 6 1
Integrator: i
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
i
16
Location of rarm: Latitude: P.5j- LJ L [� Longitude: LIU LP�
Io9 50 1-8 beti -tat) • 3 m i Ins - Z. -. Oh tO
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
i
[--]Laver
I ❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -La ers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
ElTurkev Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heife)
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
1 Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number:;j Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
1 Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
/ Identifier: Oorl
U Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
*o
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental) hreat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
El Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
ElNE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No
N
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ YesX
o
El NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ElYes
No
El NA El NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 Ibs (:]Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drifl ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) EL,
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
�f
Icy No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
' No
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination,[] Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ElNE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ElYes
&No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
a aoos Sb I �s� re s u l�5
• o� v e fa�.� on ? J
Reviewer/Inspector NamePhone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu Date: a
J . L 12/26/U4 ConUnued
. 1A

Facility Number: — D.1of Inspection s
Required Records S Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage R Permit readily available? 56 0 ❑ Yes y No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? Ifyes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. ZastoApplication
recrd keeping need improvement? If yes, ;�WasteAnalvsis
the appropriate box below. Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
li�w4eekly Freeboard Uje4i_l, Analysis
ainfall &Ktocking �op Yield i mute [nspe ons 04 onthly and I" Rain Inspections g?'<eather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment" ❑ Yes ❑ No � NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? �,Q rob ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? 0a 06 ❑ Yes YNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes IX No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No %NA ❑ NE
Other Issues ,may
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes l ' No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document [] Yet No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal? �n{�F i_�S�
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern'? ❑ Yes No El NA El NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately I,
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104

. ivision of Water Quality
ivision of Soil and Water Conservation ,
O Other Agency
Type of Visit +O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other p Denied Access
Facility Number 29 34 pate of Visit: 4130l2004 'Time: 0930
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold_
Farm Name: l.sti]iQ. arrrts............... County: V
-aYidam............ . rq._.. )?YS.B.C?......
Owner Name: C1arencQ_&J?�nnis_-_-- 1rAin.----------------------_-__-- Phone No:_ ----------
MailingAddress- .1.QU7..SiCeen..Road................................................................................. JD.CA'QA'.[G............................................................. 2.72,39..............
Facility Contact: Dextuis.Ld in.....................................Title:............................................... Phone No
D)av'I srQll aS0— 38ta�
s =
Onsite Representative: 12en[tis_tQio._.-.--------_-_•----------_----------- Integrator:iY.G.P.uryis,E�tr _Ln .----------_..----,
Certified Operator: l)e jajs..0 ............................... Loflin ................................................. Operator Certification Number:202a9.............................
Location of Farm:
109 south into the Town of Denton - Take a left onto NC 47 and travel about 3 miles then take a right onto Skeen Rd. (SR A
.520) for 4110 mile and the farm is on the left. T
®Swine ❑Poultry ❑Cattle ❑Horse Latitude 35 • 35 52 Longitude 80 • 04 09
Design Current
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry Capacity
Population Cattle
Capacitv Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
® Feeder to Finish
787
787
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
787
[3 Gilts
Total SSLW
106,245
❑ Boars
E�j
Number of Lagoons 1
..., .. ,, ..,m1 0
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ®No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ®No
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
-Identihi........ Lago.Qn ........ •...................... .............. • -�= = -- r-•--•--••-•--•--•--•-- ...........................
Freeboard (inches}: 53
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 29-34 . Date of Inspection 4/30/2004
is
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, El Yes N No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes N No
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? N Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes N No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
11. is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes N No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? —
❑-Yes
N No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
N No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
N No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes N No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes N No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes N No
Air Quality representative immediately.
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): I Field Copy ® Final Notes
8. Small leaks were observed around the connection of the flush pipe with the swine house. Is not a water quality concern today,
+
however.
16. Need to install a pressure gauge at the gun or have a portable one in which to check the pressure at the gun to assure uniform
coverage. Application coverage looks good, though, judging by the uniform coloring of the vegetation. "
1. Most recent copy of the permit was not with the records. Facility will be receiving new permit in Oct. 2004.
2. Don't forget to use the most recent version of the WUP in completing records (2/15/02) since PAN values have changed.
3. November 2003 waste applications did not have a waste analysis performed within 60 days (was 90 days).
3. Need to label IRR-2 form with tract and field number. Can't confirm acreage.
3. Don't forget to take 2004 soil samples.
Reviewer/Inspector Name iMelis¢a Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: t/ Date: 0
1211210.3 � � 4 +Continued

Faciliiy•Number: 29-34 of Inspection 4/30/2004 •
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? N Yes ❑ No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. N Yes ❑ No
N Waste Application ❑ Freeboard N Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
26.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
N No
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes'
N No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
N No
31.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33.
Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
35.
Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crap Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
113
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
f
7
12112103

4Dwtsion of Water Quality "
1jivi'sion of Soil and' Water Conservation �^
&Other Agency
Type of Visit Acompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit J& Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: (} ime:
Not Operational Q Below Threshold
Permitted 13 Cee�rtifi y0 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Ope ted��or kb Threshold Thrresshold• .........................
Farm Name: ..LN.L.1..41..l.- .. f� Im _ County:.. ".�4-1.�.....(......................................
- -- .......... 6
Owner Name: ...
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: `'..'. MS�,,,� -....IL-a
Certified Operator:,-,.,•,•.• --- ..
Location of Farm:
I oq 5. to ZM+pn . o
.......Lklirl.. Phone No: (..� Preen S-9 e, 33b. o ? o� 39 ...............................................�.......----------.----..
d�,..._.-.n..................................................
Nc�.............a.�.�.,3.?........................
~� -�
Title: ................................................................ Phone No: .:.7..1....Sq..Lt;._.!`a'`
%ram ..................... ......... Integrator:..N.&......... PF2-.r..9-5r.
Operator Certification Number: ..........................................
y q 7 for J m i le 5 , V-4 . orrk
UL&JI r`
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • Longitude �• �� �«
_.Design- Current' Design Current Desigro Current
Swine
Cap Po tilatioe: Poultry
WCa aci Po Madan, Cattle Ca aei ;-Po illation'`
"L
Wean to Feeder ❑Layer ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish ❑Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑Other
❑ TotalFarrow to Finish
Design Capacity
❑Gilts
❑ Boars _. _.,__. Total SSLW a
't �% Number of.Lagoons _= .
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes yo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
!ti
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment 0spillway
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
q ,Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: iJ�� 6drN..
Freeboard (inches): 5 3
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ Yes
Wo
❑ Yes
WNo
Structure 6
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: p, Date of Inspection !4j 06
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
XNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑ Yes
No
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
ko
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
Vyes
❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes
N0
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
�No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
I2. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ Ath those designat d in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
o
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
a
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
fNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
o
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
El
No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
k No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor below -Ei-yms—E�tNo
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes KNo
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes �(No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes iNo
Air Quality representative immediately.
Comments (refer toque 6n #) izplain'any YES answers and/or any recomitnendations or,anY,other comments.
.Use drarv[ngs of facility to better explain situations (use additionid pages as necessary) teld Copy �❑ Final Notes mm
ry
a
tJ�/1
�- , n 0 a-
LA.DQ
o
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur
Date:
12112103 FT
j I
Continued

Facility Number: — of Inspection .
Required Records & Documents
21.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
A Yes
❑ No
22.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
Yes
❑ No
23.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Yes
❑ No
Waste Application ❑ F�eeboard Waste Analysis ❑ Soilampling
24.
Is facility not in compliancetivith any applicable setback criteria irreffect at the time of design?
❑Yes
No
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
X.
26.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
No
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) ❑ Yes XNo
3 L If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes /❑ No
32, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey? ❑ Yes ❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yie]d Form ❑ Rainfall [:]Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
© No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
dditi6nal Comments and/or'Drawings:
t r r
WIN-; 0 Mg 2 -MV Z
E I
12112103

hnical Assistance Site Visit Repo
Divislon of Soil and Water Conservation
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other...
Facility Number 29 -
34
Date: 8113103
Time: 1 11:00 1
Time On Farm: 60 WSRO
Farm Name Loflin Farms
County Davidson
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 1007 Skeen Road
Onsite
Representative Dennis Loflin
Type Of Visit
® Operation Review
❑ Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
❑ Technical Assistance
❑ Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
IS Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
787
426
Denton NC
Integrator N G Purvis Farms, Inc.
Purpose Of Visit
© Routine
Q Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Q Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Q Response to complaint/local referral
Q Requested by producer/integrator
0 Follow-up
Q Emergency
n Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
27239
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3• Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding []yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5• Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment [:]yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier Lagoon
Level (Inches) 30
CROP TYPES Fescue -graze
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES BaD
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
27239
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3• Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding []yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5• Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment [:]yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier Lagoon
Level (Inches) 30
CROP TYPES Fescue -graze
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES BaD
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
❑ Other
27239
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3• Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding []yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5• Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment [:]yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier Lagoon
Level (Inches) 30
CROP TYPES Fescue -graze
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES BaD
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number 29 = 34 Date:
8/13103
PARAMETER
QQ No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
El
El❑
10. Level in structural freeboard
26. Waste Plan Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
Conditional
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure Integrity compromised
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
29. Missing Components {list in comments}
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
30. 21-1.0200
❑
❑
[115. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Latelmissing waste analysis
33. Organizetcomputerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement -
- 35.-Sludge-or Closure"Plan -
'❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker checkicalibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation design/installation
❑
❑
❑ Other...
system
Date'
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1
47. Evaluate WAD certificationfrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage work/evaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
El
5'
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6
58. Crop/forage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/ 10/03

0 0.
Facility Dumber 29 - 34 Date: 1 8113103
(COMMENTS:
Waste analysis: 2-18-03 ALS 0.71 lbs.N11000 gals. I, 8-02-03 ALS 0.83 Ibs.N11000 gals. B
Soil analysis dated 8-07-03
Facility and records are in compliance.
Provided Mr. Loflin with some freeboard, lrr-I and 1rr-11 forms.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST lRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 8/15103
Entered By: IRocky Durham
03/10/03

4Wision of Water Quality
O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
(Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
"ate of Visit: 02/27/2003 Time: 1025
Facilit�� Number 29 34
O 7Not operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: 9.112.II.Z03„
Farm Name:
County: : Aa�xidsart .......................................... LnfMtYa.rrxts..................... ..SRO ........
Owner Name: Glaxei1rc_,. A�e�►tais........... Lafli,a........................................................... Phone No:
Mailing Address: 10.R.7..S1fe��l. R�td................................................................................. JR.O.Q.II...NC............................................................. 2.7,23.9 ..............
Facility Contact: 1)eutzis.Lv ia................. �ti S9 Z 7 �tia ................................ Title:................................................................ Phone No: ..� ... p............
Onsite Representative: D.cutis.L.af11.[t.............................................................................. Integrator: ......................................
Certified Operator:X.cjaujs.0 ............................... L901a ................................................ Operator Certification Number:2.02,39 .............................
Location of Farm:
109 south into the Town of Denton - Take a left onto NC 47 and travel about 3 miles then take a right onto Skeen Rd. (SR AL
2520) for 4110 mile and the farm is on the left.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 35 S2 Longitude 80 • 04 04 'I
Design Current
Swine CaDaCitV Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
787
0
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer 71 1 JE] Dairy
❑ Non -Layer L I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 787
Total SSLW 106,245
Number of Lagoons I 1 I I[] Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps 1 0 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Dischart'es & Stream Inttmets
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑yes ❑ No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .......... Lagaan .....................................................................
........... ..........................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 39
05103101 1., F! I r Continued

Facility Number: 29-34 0 Date of Inspection 02/27/2003 1 0a I .. ,
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes N No
seepage, etc.)
b. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes ®No
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
N No
Waste Aoplication
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12.
Crop type Fescue (Hay) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
N No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
N No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
N No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
[-]-Yes
®No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
15.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
N No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WL3P, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
Yes
N No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
N No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
N No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
N No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
19. No waste applied in 2002 so no application, soil or waste analysis records required today. Operator plans on applying waste this
Spring.
_Ak
Will be getting 420 pigs tomorrow. Facility has been empty about a month.
2/ 18/03 waste analysis = 0.71 lbs. N11000 gal.
Reviewer/inspector Name Melis 4a Rosebrock
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date: pG
05103101 y Continued

Facility -Number: 29-34 l*f Inspection 02/27/2003
7
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes ® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes ® No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes ® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes ® No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a pennanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ® No
Adaitional Comments and/orDrawings:
26. NIA
05103101

• l6 d
ivision of Water Qd iiity
Division of Soil.ind Water Conservation
Q Other Agency `
F
of Visit Compliance inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
on for Visit Routine Q Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: I — ime:
10 Facility Number
�,,( Not Operational Below Thresholldd�� " �-�"
LYI Permitted C)ertifieedd C] Conditionally Certified ©Registered Date Last Operated
door,,Above Threshold: Z2 b3
Farm Dame: [ 16 _ County: pay la 5Q6
Owner Name: L � �7 C� . t h +S IWl _I n Phone l�o: '� � � aS r `�� a9 l��n15
Mailing Address: /DI✓ / . ] keen 2-a' - I b a� C— a -7 ^-
Faciliry Contact: ]b & � :5 LD-f 1 i i3 Title: Phone No: 61S ! J d,3
Onsite Representative: [ 1n Integrator: A319 & iy lZ
Certified Operator: _ fir] Operator Certification Number: C2 �023
Location of Farm: 0
IDq 5• a5 t en on . OD40.N C # 7. -3 s T n can
U f
.W
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �' • 0" Longitude �o d T
Design Current Design Current
Design Current
Swine Ca acity Population Poultry attle
ilation C
Ca acits Population
_
❑Wean to Feeder ❑ Laver ❑ Dairy
eeder to Finish ❑ Non -Laver I I 1 ❑ Non-Dairy
l
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow Feeder ❑ Other
to
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
g 7
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
�� a
Number of Lagoons 3 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La o0o Area ❑ Spray Field rea
Holding Ponds /Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management Svstem
Discharbes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑YesNo
Discharge originated at: El Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes NNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?[Spillway❑
Yes WN
tuStructure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Strucre 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
identifier: 00 is
Freeboard (inches):
05103101 y a
Continued

Facility ]lumber: — _JDate of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?-(ie/ trees, severe erosion, El No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? El Yes No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
i. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes XN 0
N''aste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes No
11. Is there evidence of over application? Exe ssive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ T 1, those atcd n Ige Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ANo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ElYes No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes V.No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No
Required Records & Documents /
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available. ❑ Yes k No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified An' W to Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ VrUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yest
o
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ ' ton. freeboard. w to analysis &Rse+�awple-repaTts) ❑ Yeso
20.Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yeso
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes *0
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes No
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? El[]IN
o
V4' 25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AMP? ❑ Yeso
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments. (refer to question 9): Explain any YES answers and/or anv recommendations or.any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain 'situations. (use additional pages as necessary): Field Conv ❑ Final Notes
ReviewerlInspector Name cc
ReviewerAnspector Signature: Date:
05103101 I V ` Continued

Facility Number: aCl —�
0
Date of tnspt-ction
40
.Xa7D3
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below o
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? V
27, .Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
28. Is there any evidence of grind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation. asphalt, ❑ Yes No
roads. building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes Xvo
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters. etc.) ❑ Yes No
31. Do the animals feed storage bin; fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes 114
No
Additional Comments and/or Dra►►•ings:
Lot" Sao o
�10 cu, at
aooa. y19n�_a=d�
Ot, .he�u+ceA-�2��
05103101

0 stop of W
Oater Quality
wsion of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Fallow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 8/27/2002 'rime: 9:00
Facility Number 29 34
Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
M Permitted M Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: 1.+9.dint.ftrms.................. ...... County: 1)�Xxdsgut.......................................... W...S.RQ........
..........................................................................
Owner Name: C1axe.n �. G..1?gztlal,........... L.�QMU........................................................... Phone No: 3 - 9:.2.Z3.9...........................................................
A'lailing Address:]lOQ.7..S{�e�Ix.LiQ�td................................................................................. M.q.to.0... NK............................................................ Z723.9 ..............
FacilityContact: ..............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: L .j:)j AIS.Lr.R[jij3.............................................................................. Integrator: lY..�i. kUCXx5.. 07CITx5,.LiA�.........................
Certified Operator:JD.gaWs.0 ............................... L.nf1. n................................................ Operator Certification Nuniber:ZQ2,39 .............................
Location of Farm:
109 south into the Town of Denton - Take a left onto NC 47 and travel about 3 miles then take a right onto Skeen Rd. (SR AL
2520) for 4110 mile and the farm is on the left.
M Swine []Poultry []Cattle []Horse Latitude Longitude 80 • 04 09
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Pani lation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
787
350
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer PE] Dairy
❑ Non -Layer Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 787
Total SSLW 106,245
Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discltarge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
'Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate'? M Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes M No
Sin,cture 6
Identifier: ....................
Freeboard (inches): 60
05103101
Continued

Facility Number: 29-34 Date of Inspection 8/27/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the i�rity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ ire*evere erosion,
. seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
®No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ®No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? -❑-Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (iel irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
®No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22,
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
Q No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
The facility has not had to apply waste this year, No waste or soil analysis required.
Facility looks good.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 29-34 Dai f Inspection $12712002
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
ngs:
0
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
J
05103101

i- sion of Water Quality
O sion of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit © Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 29 34 Date of Visit: 3/14/2002 Time: 0930
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold : .........................
Farm Name: Loihia.D 7tmh..................... County: A,�X1dwn......................... NNISRO........
............................................................................ .... ......
Owner Name: CJargttct�.&.]?gztmis........... LR11in........................................................... Phone No: ��.�-#�2:..4.Q�9.])��n�uis-klttxne....................
Mailing Address: 1.0.01Sl CII.RoAd .............................. .. A.n.0.0... 1N.C............................................................ 2.7.23.9 ..............
Facility Contact: I)eaxtis..LA.tU.................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No: 33.6,.85.9,S23.7-Shop............
Onsite Representative: JD.jza 1.iS.L.RJIin.............................................................................. Integrator: ......................................
Certified Operator: D.c[tWs.C............................... L0111a ................................................ Operator Certification Number: ZQZ39 ..................
Location of Farm:
l09 south into the Town of Denton - Take a left onto NC 47 and travel about 3 miles then take a right onto Skeen Rd. (SR +
1520) for 4110 mile and the farm is on the left.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 35 52 ;4 Longitude F 80 • fl4F 09
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
787
380
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I 1c]Non-Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 787
Total SSLW 106,245
Number of Lagoons 1 I ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area JCI Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds L SoIid Traps 0 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge origutated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ..........Lagoon.......... ........
Freeboard (inches): 72
05103101 �/ �� ' J Continued

Facility Number: 29-34 • Date of Inspection 3/14/2002 0
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes N No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes N No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes N No
'Waste Ar mlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? []Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN [:]Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Corn (Silage & Grain) Pasture
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes N No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ®No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes N No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
N No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
N No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
N No
23.
Did ReviewerlInspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): . py ®Final Noes T
17. Operator had not yet received his copy of the permit issued 3/8/02.
+
19. Last waste application was March 2000. No application, waste, or soil test records required this visit. Will need to keep freeboard
now, per permit.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melissa Rosebrock
ReviewerlInspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 29-34 DaJoinspection 1 3/14/2002
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
ngs:
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
J

t
ivision of Water Quality
ivision of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit X Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit ktoutine O Complaint Q Follow up 0 Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
D
Facility Number ate of Visit:
0 Permitted Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 1311egistered
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: , 1
Certified Operator: eno-kS
Location of Farm:
Time:
Date Last Operated or Above T reshold:
County "LJ wV S C
Phone No:
33b• gs q.
..s 23 7
Integrator: INU f U F V t
Operator Certification Number: RO ;t,
37
nx; I � 1 �o 03n � � 'uentor) . t e+- o nta 1 e, h� y Y' I • /G t on
S a. Firm nn le. P+
XSwine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®0 4 ® u Longitude F—R-vl' ° aw
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑
Wean to Feeder
1
10 Layer
❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish
3 0
❑Non -La Non -Layer
❑Non Dai
El
Farrow to Wean
❑ Other
❑
Farrow to Feeder
❑
Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
❑
Gilts
Total SSLW
�p
❑
Boars
Number of Lagoons / JU Subsurface Drains Present U Lagoon Area 1LJ ld Area � Spray Fie'
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps ID No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Immoacts �,(
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? El Yes )J No
Discharge originated at: El Lagoon El Spray Field ❑ Other , `
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑yes ❑ No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes Q(J No
Waste Collection & Treatment XSpillway
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ElYes �No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Lie
Freeboard (inches):
05103101 Continued
>

R
Iq
Facility Number: p� — Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes No
seepage, etc.) II`,
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ANO
closure plan? El Yes
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes o
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes KNO
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding. ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes No
� 3 A
12. Crop type .W/IMA00 &7AsA j.-ff,6,. , .l'
13. Do the receiving crops differ wA those designated Uthe Certified Animal Wastl Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
El Yes
No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
El Yes
No
16.
is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
WUP,
El Yes
6
(ie/ checklists, design, maps, etc.) ✓ ✓ /
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
WNo
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
'Vn0
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
wo
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
o
to
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
El Yes
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
El Yes
No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
tAly�-r-_
i
Reviewer/Inspector Name
ReviewerAnspector Signature: Date:
05103101
Continued

0
Facility Number: — .3 Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
e N-n E9 NO
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
i
05103101

0
h•
ivisiion of Water Quality
vision of Soil and Water Conservation
their Agency
Type of Visit *Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O1 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date or Visit: 10/1?l2001 Time: 0930 Printed on: 10/12/2001
29 34
0 Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
0 Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered pate Last Operated or Above Threshold: ..............
Farm Name: Lolli aYa.Ima............................. County: D;ayjdsotx.......................................... !' SR.0........
................................................................... .
Owner Name: Glargnc.&. ....... LOW ........................................................... Phone No: Detuttis.(EAo t�).. , S9A40�9..........................
MailingAddress: 100.7..5.kmt.Roatd................................................................................. De.Ottoa...N.C............................................................. 2723.9 .............
...Title Phone No
Facility Contact: Ded1,R1S..LeA TA ......................... Ti
tle: ................................................................. .aunt. . „ .... .............
OnsiteRepresentative: I?!:m[1i&.1rRtlf�tl.............................................................................. Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: j(jq:XtfX S.................................... LOJU l................................................ Operator Certification Number:2023-9 .............................
Location of Farm:
109 south into the Town of Denton - Take a left onto NC 47 and travel about 3 miles then take a right onto Skeen Rd. (SR +
1520) for 4/10 mile and the farm is on the left.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 35 S2 Longitude 80 • 04F 09 4.
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
787
375
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Cavacitv Po ulation Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer F�]❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity F 787
Total SSLW 106,245
Number of Lagoons I 1 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagonn Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps L 0 1 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges R Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Ifyes. notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge`?
Waste Collection K Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ..........Lagoon .......... ...................................
Freeboard (inches): 72
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
05103101 5 -117 Continued

Facility Number: 29-34 Dale of Inspection 10/12/2001 Printed on; 10/12/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ treoevere erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? Yes ®No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Fescue (Hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
® Yes
❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate .acreage.for.land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required -Records &_Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
E3 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #,): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): El Field Copy ®Final Notes
13. Ask SWCD about fescue hay (is pasture in WUP).
_
27. Any burial of mortality is >300' from any waters of the state.
Spring of 2000 was last application event. Left freeboard form with operator.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Meli¢sa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. I! Date: Q
05103101 V i Continued

J'acility Number: 29-34 I of Inspection 10/12120(}1 Printed on: 10/12/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28, Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29_ is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
[� " �tlona (>omments an r� irawmgs
A,
w
05103101

N ��r. '"vision Of Water Q*ahty _
K� # tf� x , �v�3ion of Sod and:.Wstek Conservati(
® r s Q Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint Q Follow up Q Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: Time:
Q Not O erational Q Below Threshold
13 Permitted x ICertified 13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: .................. 41......i &I-Das ................................................................ County:.. . ..
Owner Name:... .�. r ..°! ..1'.J�r!.,t.n..`�,J..... 'ln........................... Phone No:.... ......b....$ ....a." . 1...................:.
Facility Contact: ... .:.... ...... M..,.......... 44M ................................................................ Phone No: 33& '9,S ...
Mailing Address: N.C..........a... !.
`.....�... ............................................... ....................................-----
Onsite Representative:.... 1..� � .....t .... .......................................... Integrator: U.1..V s......................... .................................
Certified Operator:..,h.=G-1 V1-l.-5..... L.Of Iv,. . Operator Certification Number: R'Qca3<-
............... . ....
Location of Farm:
I jDq 5orj -�Itn. Le+= oH6 Hwy 47, ejh 11M Seen /fir•
Arswine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®* C « Longitude ®0 E�` EZM«
Design Current Design Current Design .Current
Swine• . Capacity Population Poultry Ca aci Po ulation Cattle Ca aci Po ulation.:;
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
eeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity 17
Gilts
❑ Boars 'Total SSLW I/,4�
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding -Ponds / 5olidTraps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. Ir discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? L�',pillway
% Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 ��` Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ..Lr(.. ...................................................................................................... ....
Freeboard (inches):
5100 1 d�
❑ Yes do
Yes - No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑Yesxo
❑ Yes 5/0
❑ Yes %No
Structure 6
Continued on back

Facility Number:jR — Date of Inspection
019rity
5. Are there any immediate threats to the of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes o
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not property addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑Yes XNo
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes A�40
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes *0
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes IVO
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes j�Mo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN lic Overload
❑ Yes �CNo
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving cro s differ with those d ignated in thikertified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
Yes ❑ No
14• a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes RNo&R7
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes Wo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes *V No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes No
Required Records_ & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) f / /
❑ Yes No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
A No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
o
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
X0
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
o
�V0 yiolalkigns:oi &ficienUL-$ • gre )rioted• during fhis'visit, Yoo will-tooiye ijo Ifu th�r
cor'resaoridence' a�otilt this visit::: ................................ .
Comments (refer:tn question #)c Explain -any YES answers°and/or any.recom eadations`or any otltier cone nettts:. �'
Use drawings. of facility to better explain situations. (use additioiial,pages as necessary)
1
e
0000 �Ao
Reviewer/Inspector Name
to�II %/I%hf1.�Pl, :/!1!►i�l.� " t .. L�J/�Jl�l

Facility Number: a — e of Inspection !l U1
Odor Issues
26, Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes A
No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes /KNo
30, Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes o
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes )dNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
5100

ivision of Water Quality
'vision of Soil and Water Conservation
ther Agency
7
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit (9) Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Ill).11V of Visit: �/S/2001 Tillie: 9:011 Printed on: 10/2/2001
29 34
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [r Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ........................
Farm Name: laoMix.Fopts.......................................................................... County: l)Ayjdsgttx.......................................... t',SRA........
Owner Name: ClarmccA.Dwais........... Utlin........................................................... Phone No: 336-8,59..-2 3.9..._.......................................................
MailingAddress: 100.7..5t eat.&A................................................................................ 1?entoin... NC ........................................................... . 2.7.2.3.9 ..............
FacilityContact:..............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: JD.eMixi&.l..Rflit............................................................................. Integrator:N.. .1'taxis..hax�xs.,.lrx�.............._.......................
Certified Operator:l?=Ws.................................... litAin................................................ Operator Certification Number: ZQ239........ .....................
Location of Farm:
109 south into the Town of Denton - Take a left onto NC 47 and travel about 3 miles then take a right onto Skeen Rd. (SR +
2520) for 4110 mile and the farm is on the left.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude F 35 • 35 52 Longitude 80 '
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
JE1 Layer
I
I
Dairy
® Feeder to Finish
787
400
JE1 Non -Layer
I
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
787
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
105,245
El Boars
Number of Lagoons 10Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La} unn Area ❑Spray Field Arca
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharge
s R Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes [:]No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
c. If dischari e is observed. what is the estimated flow in gallmin'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? []Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? [:]Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? to Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier: ................................... ........---.. .........................
Freeboard (inches): 72
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 29-34 Date (1l' lnspeclim) 5/8/211i11 Prinled on:
5. Are there any immediate threats to the Minrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ treoevere erosion,
5. Are there any immediate threats to the
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
10/2/2001
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
i 1 _ Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze) Fescue (Hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records R Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19, Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did ReviewerMspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
[:]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
_❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑Field Copy ®Final Notes
Mr. Loflin has not had to apply any waste since the Spring of 2000. He has not had animals until recently.
Facility is in good shape.
_
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101
Continued

F.akity Number: 29-34 D: + of Inspection 5/S/20[11 � Primed on: 10/2/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[:)Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments and/or rawings:
05103101
05103101

El
` Division of Water Quality
ivision of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: R3/2000 'rime: 1555 Printed on: 8/24/2000
Facility Number 29 34
_J rO Not Operational Q Below Threshold
Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: 1d?.fltlt.Farm.....................
....................................... . County: DayidS91L.......................................... W5R.0........
OwnerName: Claren.Cg................................ LQflill........................................................... Phone No: 3 9...........................................................
33(t'
Facility Contact: Q��1[11S..1a9f,tpt.................................................Title:................................................................ Phone NO: .................. .g........S
............ T6.o-q
Mailing Address: XOQ7.Sk"rt.Ra9d.................................................
Onsite Representative:ja�lp�g„X,QX]
Certified Operator: X?gjjWs..C...............................
Location of Farm:
...................... Dvntom... NC............................................................. 2.7.23.9 .............
....................... Integrator: ......................................................................................
...................... Operator Certification Number: Z0239.............................
i09 south into the Town of Denton - Take a left onto NC 47 and travel about 3 miles then take a right onto Skeen Rd. (SR AL
.520) for 4/10 mile and the farm is on the left.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 ' 35 4 S2 46 Longitude 80 • 04 ' 09 46
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Pnnulatian
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
® Farrow to Finish
75
12
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I IF-] Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 75
Total SSLW 106,275
Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ l,aga)n Area ID Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Soled Traps 1 0 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
1V .ste Collection ._& Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: .......... Lagoon ........... .................. :................. .................. :................. .....:............................... .... :................................ ....
Freeboard (inches): 80
5100
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
Continued on back

Facility Number: 29-34 • Date of Inspection 8/23/2000 Printed on: 8/24/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees*ere erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
b. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
l4. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a_wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? -❑-Yes - 9 No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records &Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0: o yi ) O P . ns:or dericienefes•were,noted :duiing•this visit: N u'Wili recei*e.no�ftirthe�• : •
:: eorresDondence. about this :visit. :: ........ :: ...
:::: :: ..... . .. :
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No

Facility Number: 29-34 a of Inspection 8/23/2000 Printed on: 8/24/2000
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
® No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
�tton.-omrnentstari ors �rawtnfgs:"'_
5100

IA
Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit 1) Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit (WRoutine Q Complaint Q Follow up Q Emergency Notification Q Other
❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: 06 -Ante: + S Printed on: 7/21/2000
o2-
0 Not Operational Q Below Threshold
Permitted �Certified [3Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:Farm Name: ........... Latin ......I.. a r.rY..l.,5............... I ................................... ....... County:...T.)&Vids .on...........................-...............
Owner Name: ... 0-lire . dz.. .. L Q.F.Li n......... ............................. Phone No: ..... -3.3k...... �.ls..53 ............
Facility Contact: i..�.......Lt?.��1.n................ . ritle: ................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: .�`l".�.�....13*..,5............. .. .. .. .-�...-%. L.Q!1... �� ��.�.a'.3.�...................
........................... ..
Onsite Representative. „-- ex�C,. ......... Integrator:......
p(.'......................................---......................................................................
Certified Operator:,.Q�}j'}J„� W`t" �i li Operator Certification Number;,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Location of Farm:
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 4 �•
Design Current
awtne
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
arrow to Finish
Gi Its
Boars
Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
s
�i
Longitude �• �< �
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Po ulation
1❑ Dairy
E] Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW l d
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ l.avan Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 10 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Imuacl5
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation! ❑ Yes XNo
L�ischar�e originated at: []Lagoon' ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, .vas the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
h. If discharge is ohserved. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is t)bscrved..whttt is the estiin:iled flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge'? ❑ Yes o
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes )(No
I Su'ucture I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6.
Identifier: .� 0 dh.............. ...................... ............................... ..... ...... I.............................
Freeboard (inches): ,
5100 Continued on back

facility Number: —,3 I}ate of Iitspectiun1912,n lobPrinted on: 7/21/2000
. 5. Are there any immediate threats to Apgrity of any of the structures observed`? (ie/ tri�CS, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination'?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement'?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & DocumenGy I
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available'? N
18, Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available'?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps. etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ irrigation waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge'?
22, Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency'?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0; N6-,061ati6iis;oi-• dehe,ier'cies mere noted, du -rang 3his:vi'sit: Yoi*4 •t e* i<eiye iii #'urthet� ; ;
coriesparicter><ce:ab' 0hisyisit. :': .':: : :': :':': :.':'. .':':':: :'::'::: :
❑ Yes j� No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes XNO
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
um �■ l •
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
rn�e SOcLb r nS
pe
cdn
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
ElYes No
❑ Yes IK No
❑ Yes XNo
Reviewer/Inspector Name

FamciCty Number: JCJ — e of Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? tjIYI ! amp,
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
orn IT, aodo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes KNO
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes XNO
❑ Yes No
5/00
J

• Q`Dtvtston`,of Water Quality t
Division:of Soil and'Water Conserr n
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: 5/31/200Q 'Time: 14:1U Printed on: 8/21/2000
29 34
Q Not O erational Q Below Threshold
0 Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .•..••.•..••.....
Farm Name: L,O LINF:A1iMS......
County: V;AyjdSam
WSRO........
Owner Name: ClaJCmwe................................ LR£llxt........................................................... Phone No: 33.6:.859:-223.9 ...........................................................
FacilityContact:.............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No: ,..................................................
MailingAddress: lit,.3... Rox.5.Q............................................................ ... De.010,0...NK............................................................ 2.7.239 .............
Onsite Representative: Mmixis.){.,gjlin................. Integrator:..,,.,,.
Certified Operator: JDcixW5.O............................... l,,Obi[A................................................ Operator Certification Number:, Q239.............................
Location of Farm:
109 south into the Town of Denton - Take a left onto INC 47 and travel about 3 miles then take a right onto Skeen Rd. (SR
2520) for 4/10 mile and the farm is on the left.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 35 52 Longitude 1 SO 10 04 09
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
100
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
® Farrow to Finish
75
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity F 75
Total SSL W 1 106,275
Number'4ItAgdons I ❑ Subsurface Drains Present I ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 10 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Strearn.Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ... :................................
Freeboard (inches): 60
5100 Continued on back

Facility Number: 29-34 * of Inspection 1 5/31/2000 Pr' on:
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe 'ion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management of
closure plan?
8/21 /2000
[].Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11, Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Fescue (Hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? - ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
o yiolatiotis:o de#iciencie5 were noted during . . this: visit.. . i .. . .. no further
correspondence: about this :visit:
eWWings.,of facility to better explatn.sttuations. (use additional pages'as necessary):
:ords look good. Lagoon was pumped down.
e lagoon had been closed out. Has not recieved General Permit application yet.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes IN No
1W
Reviewer/Inspector Name �Ro�cicy Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

Facility Number: 29-34 Date of Inspection 5/31/2000 Printed on.- 8/21/2000
dnr Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
�❑ Yes
® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
.
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
® No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
a
At
5100
J

NDn of Soil and Water Conservation - Oper Rev
O D wof Soil and Watter Conservation - Comp _ %;In,
13`Division-of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection `
[3"Other Agency - Operation Review
10 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number 29 34 Date of Inspection 3/tt/99
Time of Inspection I1:15 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted ® Certified C] Conditionally Certified Q Registered 0 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: laOkLlN.kQ1S........................................................................................ County: Vmids.Q.a ...................................... ]1'RA........
-;7; ��
Owner Name: . jat:etlte................................ Loftin........................... Phone No:�.'-223`1....................................................................
Facility Contact: ...................................................... ................ Title: ............... Phone No:
Mailing Address: fit...3... flAx.S.Q..........................................................................
Onsite Representative: Mi0.tl s.Loffin ....................
...............
..... 0.4m.ton... NC............................................................. 272. 9..............
.............. Integrator:......................................
Certified Operator: MnWs.0 ...... ......................... Uffin ................................................ Operator Certification Number:Z(1239............................,
Location of Farm:
xU9.so�ttlt.Atxto.xhe-lo�tan..o[.Aint4n.-..�a1��..a.1 �t..12>Utt.Q.)`1G..47.and.tK;�txel. bout.3.mile ..tktern..tyke...sight.onto.Sk nt.l�dn. l3........ A.
kA
Latitude 35 • 35 ° 52 « Longitude SO • 04 { 09 f.
Design Current
Swine Capacity PODUlation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
® Farrow to Finish
75
0
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I 1E] Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I 1 1[3 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 75
Total SSLW 106,275
Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area I0 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 0 No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): fl............................................................................................................................ ...................................................... .......
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3123/99 Continued on back
Printed on 11/1/99

_1
Facility Number: 29-34 Phrough
Date of Inspection'
6. Are there structures on -site w are not properly addressed and/or managed a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze)
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
Cl Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
I& Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0; N'6'*iblati6iis:o"r deficien�ies•were noted during this: visit.:You:wiII receive'no'ftirther.:'-
corresporidence ab"f this' i it' : ::: ::: :: :: ::: : : :
9 Installed marker doesn't have top of dike.
17 Has not recieved General Permit yet,
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes CO No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham 1
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: I
on 11/1/99

Facility Number 29 34 Date of Inspection 11/9/99
Time of Inspection 0930 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified E3 Registered Not O eratfonal I Date Last Operated:
Farm Name:>C,AFLIN.FARMS ............................. .. County: vayjdsant.......................................... !?!',SRQ........
Owner Name: Ciarecm................................ LOW .......................................................... Phone No: 33.6. 59-2239...........................................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: 105�.7..Slt�ep�.tiQ;�d................................................................................. Vv,.moAk..N.0 ............................................................ 2.7.239...............
OnsiteRepresentative: l7vlp9js.LoGjn................... ......................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:iDcn3ntis.0........................
....... CQZ>x................................................ Operator Certification Number: 7.Q23Q.,.,,.........,,,,..
Location of Farm:
XQ9.S91kt�1.aF1��R.11t1.�..�Olt')[1.9�.1?.g1i.G4I#.-.�.arilC..a.A��t.SI10.1:R.�C..47.7.t1�.11�71Y.�A.�>t?Ak.>k.,3.tt1.l1�S..f��xt.�.a..flg�#t.0I1lL0.S1;.��Al.�.dA.LS�i........�
Latitude 35 • 35 1 52 C{ Longitude 80 o 04 4 09 L[
Design Current
Swine Caoacitv Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
200
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
® Farrow to Finish
1 75
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 75
Total SSLW 106,275
Number of Lagoons 1 I (La Subsurface Drains Present j[❑ Lagoon Area J❑ Spray Field Area i
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Strea Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ................ 6Q............... .................................... ......................
............. .................................... .................................... ....................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99
❑ Yes ® No
Continued on back
Printed on 11/9/99

Facility Number: 29-34 Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site are not properly addressed and/or managed t rough a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type Fescue (Hay)
I ll9/99
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (icl irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design'?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Reviewer/Inspector Name Ijennifer Frye I
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: /�� %/�
Printed on 11/9199

Facillxy Number. 29-34 Date of Inspection 11/9/99 40
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
® No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
® No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
® No
` thong .tommentsTari .or1awttigsi k_ �_ f A ,r
AU
Printed on 11/9/99

r
�vou :tea.,.: � ,;--:.0 .: a...,w,.«;:,vooiASa�,�� x=<x,.-:-,,.r �-��.,;..,..:, , ' _•`-�,::'�:
❑ DivisiM of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
Division of Water Quality
19 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up o1'DNVQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Registered 19 Certified d Applied for Permit 0 Permitted 0 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ....... QV ;1i V' ; %Y,t 7.. County: qv;.�t sa r%.........................................
Owner Name: ...... C.l.a f.e.r.ce.........k.P-hYj ......................................... Phone No:.C.��.�. ...�`��...r.a d�..�.�..........
Facility Contact: ......................................................... .. `Title:.................... .. Phone No:
Bailing Address: ... k.3....... Sox ....5_0.................................... ....... .....a '�. ��I y,....I�II..C........................ •
Onsite Representative:......f;%ii.> rj.............lr-.L7T1f•r�.�]........................... Integrator :............................................ ..........................................
Certified Operator;......,0.ez7a-%xF-.,f..........Z11P.:_.' f.7.......................... Operator Certification Number;....2Q. .. .
Location of Farm.
........ 1<.e e_n...... �.......................... M1.�lA.......��Q. Lti. r� �1.5..........t*?—t ... 2J?..:-041...................................................................
aL ......................................................................................................... ............................................................................. ................................................................................... .
Latitude [�° E]�° =11
Design Currenk
Swine? :; : Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Longitude
Design Current
Poultry . Capacity Population Cattle
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ID Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity:,'
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons / Holding Pond' 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area
..,..n..;M ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon Cl Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface. Water? (If yes. notify DWQ)
c. If dischargc is observed, what is the estimated flow in ,al/min?
.d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (lt' yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse. impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
mai ntenance/i m prove men t?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
;n Current
:ity.. Population
Spray Field Area
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes )t No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
ANo
❑ Yes
O(No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ Yes
No
Continued on buck

Facility Number: —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagootls.Holdin?_ lPonds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1
Structure
Identifier ...............................1..
.......3.�...I................
Freeboard l't
( ): .................Q.........,...
... ....................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the
structures?
Structure 3 Structure 4
11. is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes )j No
❑ Yes KNo
Structure 5 Structure 6
15. Crop type ......... �5. .t.� ...........................................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency'?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
No. violationsor deficiencies.werenoted during this:visit. You_:will receive•no,ftirtlier
corresporidence about this'visit:-: .
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes XNO
.........................................
❑ Yes
KNo
El Yes
fNo
❑ Yes
�No
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
O(No
❑ Yes
k No
❑ Yes
No
A
ElYes
XNo
iw khe. i 41 s n pe ft4,te n vi-e- 4 ,, +o be' c h4 n ed Pi -Hie j
GT" 41 w1 11 b2 clet sed III +he d15fan-f
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: